Listed here are the basic problems with the evolutionary theory. If any of you brilliant evolutionary scientists out there could help answer these questions I would be interested in reading your point of view:
(1) If evolution was true then wouldn't we see thousands of transitional forms of creatures between the species? They should represent the thousands of possibilities of the various evolving features of the creature such as feet, hands, lungs, eyes, skin, hair, etc. These should show up in the fossil record as well as be living and breathing today, right? Instead, we see humongous gaps between species.
(2) If evolution was true then how do you explain language? This is incredibly complex and requires cognitive skills and intelligence to develop and propogate a language. Where is the proof of that?
(3) how does evolution explain the incredible complexity of the human hand, eye, and brain? Especially considering the lack of transitional forms (see question 1) it seems way too far fetched that these devices happened by chance.
(4) how does evolution explain the cognitive harmony or discord between people depending on personality compatabilites or differences? Why would such things exist and why would they develop to ensure the "survival of the fittest" especially when humans can also give grace and show forgiveness? Another way to explain this is to compare the difference in emotional response to music in the minor key versus the major key. Science can explain the music theory part but it doesn't explain the human spirit's reaction and emotional response to the different songs.
I look forward to your answers. Thank you.
-atg-
A thoughtful comment on this article... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientific-study-paper-creator-intelligent-design-plos-one-creatorgate-a6910171.html
ReplyDeletemikehawkslarge
I have a degree in Biology, am a disciple of the scientific method and my religion is always to seek the truth regardless of what the truth may be - even if I personally don't like it. To that end, there is no doubt whatsoever that life on this planet is absolutely a design - everything about it - every detail, every bit of intricate skillful complexity required forethought - not happenstance, not molecules sticking to one another, bolts of lightning hitting those salt ponds at the right atmosphere and temperatures, or anything else, then randomness mixed with entropic eventuality combined with deleterious mutation ruling the day over billions of years (on Earth) ending up with anything organized at all - much less alive.
Do the math - I have - there is not enough time on this planet ( 4.543 billion years) to end up with the result of life (all of it) as we know it to exist as it does.
Odds are dramatically and exponentially against life ever being able to take such a foothold and evolve to where it is currently on this planet. The laws of evolution as we understand them and the number of cataclysmic events this planet has suffered simply do not allow for it.
All you other scientists out there reading my post - be honest with yourselves - you know what I'm saying is right.
The fact is we simply don't really know. We just don't. All we can do is gather data, analyse it and get ever so much closer to what we believe is the truth yet never ever really be sure we have gotten there. That is science. We need to continue the scientific method and ignore the urge to discount other hypotheses or beliefs. Criticizing others is not what science is about. It's about continually searching for the answers to our questions through measurable, observable, verifiable, quantifiable, results,in a controlled disciplined way which are then repeatable by others. The Universe is 13.82 Billion years old - and that may be time enough for something to have grown out of the primordial soup somewhere else then transplanted here either deliberately or via a meteor. That's not so far fetched. Knowledge is passed along the same way. The cell phone wasn't created by one person. The information took thousands of years to come about over many lifetimes. Passed along from one generation to the next with the previous generations dying off. Why isn't that possible with earth? Why isn't it possible that life was seeded here from somewhere else that had evolved somewhere else?
Truth be told, science should not discount ideas. It should simply continue to investigate.
Science needs to continue to be science and not get distracted by side issues.
Thanks for the respectful dialogue. I understand that you are convinced that evolution is fact. Unfortunately, I am still not convinced. Perhaps I am just naturally more skeptical. I have put a lot of thought into this and have been searching for answers but haven't yet found them. For example, I am still looking for scientific proof that helps fill in these gaps in the evolutionary theory: (1) shouldn't we see thousands of transitional forms of creatures between the species? They should represent the thousands of possibilities of the various evolving features of the creature such as feet, hands, lungs, eyes, skin, hair, etc. These should show up in the fossil record as well as be living and breathing today, right? Instead, we see humongous gaps between species.
ReplyDelete(2) how does evolution explain the incredible complexity of the human hand, eye, and brain?, especially when considering the lack of transitional forms (see question 1). it seems way too far fetched that these devices happened by chance.
(3) how does evolution explain the differences in cognitive harmony or discord between people depending on personality compatibilities or differences? Why would such things exist and why would they develop to ensure the "survival of the fittest" especially when humans can also give grace and show forgiveness? Another way to explain this is to compare the difference in emotional response to music in the minor key versus the major key. Science can explain the music theory part but it doesn't explain the human spirit's reaction and emotional response to the different songs.